I loved both "El Mariachi" as well as "Desperado." They had a charming simplicity, a consistent filmmaking style, and fantastic action scenes. "Desperado," besides being packed to the brim with inventive action scenes, also occasionally slowed the pace, allowing the audience to enjoy some hilarious Tarantinoesque character scenes which are stuck in my mind, such as the opening scene with Steve Buscemi or the bar scene with Tarantino himself. Still, to this day, very few action movies I find as enjoyable as "Desperado," which was made for a measly few million.
Now, with a budget more around $26 million, Rodriguez attempts to end the mariachi trilogy with a bang, desperately trying to incorporate plenty of great characters, a complex political plot, and of course, some serious action - yet all of these attempts fail with the exception of Johnny Depp. The plot and story development are such
incomprehensible hack jobs that by the finale, no one has a damn clue what's going on. Maybe is doesn't matter, maybe confusion was the point, but then why write it? Doesn't Rodriguez realize that the success of his last two mariachi movies was in large part due to their simple stories? The plot also allows very little room for either Banderas or Hayek - Banderas seems like a supporting actor, only coming on the screen to kill a few bad guys and leaving the real acting to Depp. Salma Hayek basically has a cameo role, but has no lines, and only appears in flashbacks. So does Depp succeed with all the screen time? Most definitely - he's such a fantastic actor that even throwing him in such a mucky film can make things much better. To be honest, if it weren't for Depp's precise and direct performance, I probably would have left the theater around a half hour into it - Depp definitely saves the film.
Now onto the action, which, unfortunately, is another disappointment. Why? All because of their editing. Rodriguez apparently wasn't satisfied directing, writing, shooting, producing and scoring the film - he just had to edit it as well. Having an outside view editing a film can make things so much better - some of the best films of all time were created because of this essential collaboration between a professional editor and director working closely together. The action scenes were obviously edited by a real amateur, and it was also obvious the director edited them - an outside editor cuts things out objectively, while the director wants to cram all his ingenious shots into every scene - nothing goes to waste. So what is the result? MTV-style editing during every action scene, where angles changed so rapidly I had no idea what was going on except that I felt sick - it was almost laughable. Literally, no shot lasts more than .5 seconds. I will say one positive thing though - the movie did have a visual
luster...shooting in digital video was a nice choice, and everything does look really good when the editing doesn't ruin it. The cinematography, although visually pleasant, was another bad thing about the movie; by this time Rodriguez has made enough movies to have learned all the dumb little stylistic camera tricks in the book, and its unfortunate that he has no discretion. "Desperado" had visual continuity, while "Once Upon...." is the product of a filmmaker who obviously never went to film school, and who's philosophy on shooting is simply to point the camera at things with cool angles.
The other thing I couldn't stand was how during every action scene Rodriguez wrote some silly little slapstick-type thing to happen. "Desperado" had action scenes that were fun based on their inventive style - the fun WAS the action, whereas in "Once Upon...." Rodriguez knows the action is dull, and throws in stupid comedy, which only results in making the audience that much more unengaged.
Rourke, Mendes and Dafoe were all good and added some padding to the film, but the casting of Iglesias was such a big mistake - another example of nothing being taken seriously. Anyway, I definitely don't recommend this film - Depp is the only element of the film worth paying for, but overall I rate it like a 3/10.
Now, with a budget more around $26 million, Rodriguez attempts to end the mariachi trilogy with a bang, desperately trying to incorporate plenty of great characters, a complex political plot, and of course, some serious action - yet all of these attempts fail with the exception of Johnny Depp. The plot and story development are such
incomprehensible hack jobs that by the finale, no one has a damn clue what's going on. Maybe is doesn't matter, maybe confusion was the point, but then why write it? Doesn't Rodriguez realize that the success of his last two mariachi movies was in large part due to their simple stories? The plot also allows very little room for either Banderas or Hayek - Banderas seems like a supporting actor, only coming on the screen to kill a few bad guys and leaving the real acting to Depp. Salma Hayek basically has a cameo role, but has no lines, and only appears in flashbacks. So does Depp succeed with all the screen time? Most definitely - he's such a fantastic actor that even throwing him in such a mucky film can make things much better. To be honest, if it weren't for Depp's precise and direct performance, I probably would have left the theater around a half hour into it - Depp definitely saves the film.
Now onto the action, which, unfortunately, is another disappointment. Why? All because of their editing. Rodriguez apparently wasn't satisfied directing, writing, shooting, producing and scoring the film - he just had to edit it as well. Having an outside view editing a film can make things so much better - some of the best films of all time were created because of this essential collaboration between a professional editor and director working closely together. The action scenes were obviously edited by a real amateur, and it was also obvious the director edited them - an outside editor cuts things out objectively, while the director wants to cram all his ingenious shots into every scene - nothing goes to waste. So what is the result? MTV-style editing during every action scene, where angles changed so rapidly I had no idea what was going on except that I felt sick - it was almost laughable. Literally, no shot lasts more than .5 seconds. I will say one positive thing though - the movie did have a visual
luster...shooting in digital video was a nice choice, and everything does look really good when the editing doesn't ruin it. The cinematography, although visually pleasant, was another bad thing about the movie; by this time Rodriguez has made enough movies to have learned all the dumb little stylistic camera tricks in the book, and its unfortunate that he has no discretion. "Desperado" had visual continuity, while "Once Upon...." is the product of a filmmaker who obviously never went to film school, and who's philosophy on shooting is simply to point the camera at things with cool angles.
The other thing I couldn't stand was how during every action scene Rodriguez wrote some silly little slapstick-type thing to happen. "Desperado" had action scenes that were fun based on their inventive style - the fun WAS the action, whereas in "Once Upon...." Rodriguez knows the action is dull, and throws in stupid comedy, which only results in making the audience that much more unengaged.
Rourke, Mendes and Dafoe were all good and added some padding to the film, but the casting of Iglesias was such a big mistake - another example of nothing being taken seriously. Anyway, I definitely don't recommend this film - Depp is the only element of the film worth paying for, but overall I rate it like a 3/10.